A Snowflake customer is experiencing higher costs than anticipated while migrating their data warehouse workloads from on-premises to Snowflake. The migration workloads have been deployed on a…

Question

Options

• AThere should be another 2XL warehouse deployed to handle a portion of the load queries.
• BThe 2XL warehouse should be changed to 4XL to increase the number of threads available for
• CThe warehouse should be kept as a SMALL or XSMALL and configured as a multi-cluster
• DThe INSERTS should be converted to several tables to avoid contention on large tables that

• A
  13% (2)
• C
  81% (13)
• D
  6% (1)

Explanation

According to the Snowflake Warehouse Cost Optimization blog post, one of the strategies to reduce the cost of running a warehouse is to use a multi-cluster warehouse with auto-scaling enabled. This allows the warehouse to automatically adjust the number of clusters based on the concurrency demand and the queue size. A multi-cluster warehouse can also be configured with a minimum and maximum number of clusters, as well as a scaling policy to control the scaling behavior. This way, the warehouse can handle the parallel load queries efficiently without wasting resources or credits. The blog post also suggests using a smaller warehouse size, such as SMALL or XSMALL, for loading data, as it can perform better than a larger warehouse size for small INSERTs. Therefore, the best option to reduce the costs while minimizing the overall load times for migrating data warehouse history is to keep the warehouse as a SMALL or XSMALL and configure it as a multi-cluster warehouse to handle the parallel load queries.

No community discussion yet for this question.